₦airaland Forum

Janosky:
Hi

All these instances you are giving, holy spirit was personified.
Your Church publication provided ample evidence Scriptural evidence.
It's the same fact in both the old testament and the new testament.


The New Catholic Encyclopedia New Catholic Encyclopedia proof...
In the old testament, holy spirit is NOT a person...
Any attribute of emotion or intellectual activity to God's holy spirit are mere figures of speech..,"

The New Testament
The majority of N[ew] T[estament] texts reveal God’s spirit as something, not someone; [/b]this is especially seen in the parallelism between the spirit and the power of God. When a quasi-personal activity is ascribed to God’s spirit, e.g., speaking, hindering, desiring, dwelling (Acts 8.29; 16.7; Rom 8.9), one is not justified in concluding immediately that in these passages God’s spirit is regarded as a Person; the same expressions are used also in regard to rhetorically personified things or abstract ideas (see Rom 8.6; 7.17). [b]Thus, the context of the phrase ‘blasphemy against the spirit’ (Mt 12.31; cf. Mt 12.28; Lk 11.20), shows that reference is being made to the power of God.”

no dear, the catholic encyclopedia i have says that in those text the holy spirit is a person not just personified



Many other texts declare quite as clearly that the Holy Ghost is a Person, a Person distinct from the Father and the Son, and yet One God with Them. In several places St. Paul speaks of Him as if speaking of God. In Acts 28:25, he says to the Jews: "Well did the Holy Ghost speak to our fathers by Isaias the prophet"; now the prophecy contained in the next two verses is taken from Isaiah 6:9-10, where it is put in the mouth of the "King the Lord of hosts". In other places he uses the words God and Holy Ghost as plainly synonymous. Thus he writes (1 Corinthians 3:16): "Know you not, that you are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?" and in 6:19: "Or know you not, that your members are the temple of the Holy Ghost, who is in you . . . ?" St. Peter asserts the same identity when he thus remonstrates with Ananias (Acts 5:3-4): "Why hath Satan tempted thy heart, that thou shouldst lie to the Holy Ghost . . . ? Thou hast not lied to men, but to God." The sacred writers attribute to the Holy Ghost all the works characteristic of Divine power. It is in His name, as in the name of the Father and of the Son, that baptism is to be given (Matthew 28:19). It is by His operation that the greatest of Divine mysteries, the Incarnation of the Word, is accomplished (Matthew 1:18, 20; Luke 1:35). It is also in His name and by His power that sins are forgiven and souls sanctified: "Receive ye the Holy Ghost. Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them" (John 20:22-23); "But you are washed, but you are sanctified, but you are justified in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the Spirit of our God" (1 Corinthians 6:11); "The charity of God is poured forth in our hearts, by the Holy Ghost, who is given to us" (Romans 5:5). He is essentially the Spirit of truth (John 14:16-17; 15:26), Whose office it is to strengthen faith (Acts 6:5), to bestow wisdom (Acts 6:3), to give testimony of Christ, that is to say, to confirm His teaching inwardly (John 15:26), and to teach the Apostles the full meaning of it (John 14:26; 16:13). With these Apostles He will abide for ever (John 14:16). Having descended on them at Pentecost, He will guide them in their work (Acts 8:29), for He will inspire the new prophets (Acts 11:28; 13:9), as He inspired the Prophets of the Old Law (Acts 7:51). He is the source of graces and gifts (1 Corinthians 12:3-11); He, in particular, grants the gift of tongues (Acts 2:4; 10:44-47). And as he dwells in our bodies sanctifies them (1 Corinthians 3:16; 6:19), so will and them he raise them again, one day, from the dead (Romans 8:11). But he operates especially in the soul, giving it a new life (Romans 8:9 sq.), being the pledge that God has given us that we are his children (Romans 8:14-16; 2 Corinthians 1:22; 5:5; Galatians 4:6). He is the Spirit of God, and at the same time the Spirit of Christ (Romans 8:9); because He is in God, He knows the deepest mysteries of God (1 Corinthians 2:10-11), and He possesses all knowledge. St. Paul ends his Second Epistle to the Corinthians (13:13) with this formula of benediction, which might be called a blessing of the Trinity: "The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the charity of God, and the communication of the Holy Ghost be with you all." — Cf. Tixeront, "Hist. des dogmes", Paris, 1905, I, 80, 89, 90, 100, 101.

Janosky:
New Catholic Encyclopedia proof...
In the old testament, holy spirit is NOT a person...
Any attribute of emotion or intellectual activity to God's holy spirit are mere figures of speech..,"

The New Testament
The majority of N[ew] T[estament] texts reveal God’s spirit as something, not someone; this is especially seen in the parallelism between the spirit and the power of God. When a quasi-personal activity is ascribed to God’s spirit, e.g., speaking, hindering, desiring, dwelling (Acts 8.29; 16.7; Rom 8.9), one is not justified in concluding immediately that in these passages God’s spirit is regarded as a Person; the same expressions are used also in regard to rhetorically personified things or abstract ideas (see Rom 8.6; 7.17). Thus, the context of the phrase ‘blasphemy against the spirit’ (Mt 12.31; cf. Mt 12.28; Lk 11.20), shows that reference is being made to the power of God.”


* The New Catholic Encyclopedia have establish the biblical truth that in both old and new testament, with AMPLE EVIDENCES , God's holy spirit is NOT a person, Olodo LIENUS is looking for LIES that can not refute the antecedents in the old and new testament




Na JWs write New Catholic Encyclopedia ?
na JWs go give you the link ?
Bros you too dull

Olodo LIENUS,

the catholic encyclopedia i have says this


Many other texts declare quite as clearly that the Holy Ghost is a Person, a Person distinct from the Father and the Son, and yet One God with Them. In several places St. Paul speaks of Him as if speaking of God. In Acts 28:25, he says to the Jews: "Well did the Holy Ghost speak to our fathers by Isaias the prophet"; now the prophecy contained in the next two verses is taken from Isaiah 6:9-10, where it is put in the mouth of the "King the Lord of hosts". In other places he uses the words God and Holy Ghost as plainly synonymous. Thus he writes (1 Corinthians 3:16): "Know you not, that you are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?" and in 6:19: "Or know you not, that your members are the temple of the Holy Ghost, who is in you . . . ?" St. Peter asserts the same identity when he thus remonstrates with Ananias (Acts 5:3-4): "Why hath Satan tempted thy heart, that thou shouldst lie to the Holy Ghost . . . ? Thou hast not lied to men, but to God." The sacred writers attribute to the Holy Ghost all the works characteristic of Divine power. It is in His name, as in the name of the Father and of the Son, that baptism is to be given (Matthew 28:19). It is by His operation that the greatest of Divine mysteries, the Incarnation of the Word, is accomplished (Matthew 1:18, 20; Luke 1:35). It is also in His name and by His power that sins are forgiven and souls sanctified: "Receive ye the Holy Ghost. Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them" (John 20:22-23); "But you are washed, but you are sanctified, but you are justified in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the Spirit of our God" (1 Corinthians 6:11); "The charity of God is poured forth in our hearts, by the Holy Ghost, who is given to us" (Romans 5:5). He is essentially the Spirit of truth (John 14:16-17; 15:26), Whose office it is to strengthen faith (Acts 6:5), to bestow wisdom (Acts 6:3), to give testimony of Christ, that is to say, to confirm His teaching inwardly (John 15:26), and to teach the Apostles the full meaning of it (John 14:26; 16:13). With these Apostles He will abide for ever (John 14:16). Having descended on them at Pentecost, He will guide them in their work (Acts 8:29), for He will inspire the new prophets (Acts 11:28; 13:9), as He inspired the Prophets of the Old Law (Acts 7:51). He is the source of graces and gifts (1 Corinthians 12:3-11); He, in particular, grants the gift of tongues (Acts 2:4; 10:44-47). And as he dwells in our bodies sanctifies them (1 Corinthians 3:16; 6:19), so will and them he raise them again, one day, from the dead (Romans 8:11). But he operates especially in the soul, giving it a new life (Romans 8:9 sq.), being the pledge that God has given us that we are his children (Romans 8:14-16; 2 Corinthians 1:22; 5:5; Galatians 4:6). He is the Spirit of God, and at the same time the Spirit of Christ (Romans 8:9); because He is in God, He knows the deepest mysteries of God (1 Corinthians 2:10-11), and He possesses all knowledge. St. Paul ends his Second Epistle to the Corinthians (13:13) with this formula of benediction, which might be called a blessing of the Trinity: "The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the charity of God, and the communication of the Holy Ghost be with you all." — Cf. Tixeront, "Hist. des dogmes", Paris, 1905, I, 80, 89, 90, 100, 101.

MaxInDHouse:
Wetin Musa no go see for gate?
Catholic sef wan join talk for Nairaland, oya over to you guys come and chat with your Catholic brethren!

abeg na only muslim or only protestant suppose dey talk for nairaland?

jesusjnr2020:
Okay you should wait for him to specifically mention gay sex first, since you're the only one that doesn't know it's what takes place in the same sex-unions that your Pope endorsed.

a civil union is not a marriage and does not necessarily involve sex at least in the pastoral experience on Jorge Mario Belgogio now Pope Francis.


you can read up.


But on Wednesday Archbishop Victor Manuel Fernandez, a theologian who has long been close to the pope, suggested that the pope’s phrase is substantially equivalent to the phrase “civil union.”

The archbishop posted on Facebook that before he became the pope, then Cardinal-Bergoglio “always recognized that, without calling it ‘marriage,’ in fact there are very close unions between people of the same sex, which do not in themselves imply sexual relations, but a very intense and stable alliance. They know each other thoroughly, they share the same roof for many years, they take care of each other, they sacrifice for each other. Then it may happen that they prefer that in an extreme case or illness they do not consult their relatives, but that person who knows their intentions in depth. And for the same reason they prefer that it be that person who inherits all their assets, etc. This can be contemplated in the law and is called ‘civil union’ [unión civil] or ‘law of civil coexistence’ [ley de convivencia civil], not marriage.”


https://www.aciafrica.org/news/2204/pope-francis-homosexuality-comments-heavily-edited-in-newly-released-documentary

jesusjnr2020:
Okay you should wait for him to specifically mention gay sex first, since you're the only one that doesn't know it's what takes place in the same sex-unions that your Pope endorsed.

this is the full quote from pope francis

“Another thing is, I said when you see some signs in the children and from there send them to - I should have said a ‘professional,’ what came out was ‘psychiatrist.’ I meant to say a professional because sometimes there are signs in adolescence or pre-adolescence that they don’t know if they are homosexually oriented or if it is that the thymus gland didn’t atrophy in time. Who knows, a thousand things, no? So, a professional. The title of the daily paper: ‘The Pope sends homosexuals to the psychiatrist.’ It’s not true!”

“They asked me the same question another time and I repeated it, ‘They are children of God, they have a right to a family, and such.’ Another thing is - and I explained I was wrong with that word, but I meant to say this: When you notice something strange - ‘Ah, it’s strange.’ - No, it’s not strange. Something that is outside of the usual. That is, not to take a little word to annul the context. There, what I said is that they ‘have a right to a family.’ And that doesn’t mean to approve of homosexual acts, not at all.”


https://www.dw.com/en/vatican-clarifies-popes-comments-on-homosexual-unions/a-55478883

https://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/vatican-breaks-silence-explains-popes-civil-union-comments-73970357

https://www.aciafrica.org/news/2204/pope-francis-homosexuality-comments-heavily-edited-in-newly-released-documentary


if you take d stress of reading through things you won't be jumping after first reactions to base your agenda

jesusjnr2020:
Lol!

If you can't still see the obvious truth about your Pope up til now, the chances are that you never will, but thank God not all Catholics are blindly following the Pope as you are.

https://nypost.com/2020/10/23/catholic-leaders-condemn-popes-endorsement-of-same-sex-unions/

God bless.

even in that which you wrote i still can t see anything there about gay sex


maybe these will help you

https://www.ncronline.org/news/people/popes-civil-union-comments-appear-be-taken-out-context

this is the full quote from the interview. Atleast read well before you spread false information simply because it suits your ageda.



“I was asked a question on a flight - after it made me mad, made me mad for how one news outlet transmitted it - about the familial integration of people with homosexual orientation, and I said, homosexual people have a right to be in the family, people with homosexual orientation have a right to be in the family and parents have the right to recognize that son as homosexual, that daughter as homosexual. Nobody should be thrown out of the family, or be made miserable because of it.”

“Another thing is, I said when you see some signs in the children and from there send them to - I should have said a ‘professional,’ what came out was ‘psychiatrist.’ I meant to say a professional because sometimes there are signs in adolescence or pre-adolescence that they don’t know if they are homosexually oriented or if it is that the thymus gland didn’t atrophy in time. Who knows, a thousand things, no? So, a professional. The title of the daily paper: ‘The Pope sends homosexuals to the psychiatrist.’ It’s not true!”

“They asked me the same question another time and I repeated it, ‘They are children of God, they have a right to a family, and such.’ Another thing is - and I explained I was wrong with that word, but I meant to say this: When you notice something strange - ‘Ah, it’s strange.’ - No, it’s not strange. Something that is outside of the usual. That is, not to take a little word to annul the context. There, what I said is that they ‘have a right to a family.’ And that doesn’t mean to approve of homosexual acts, not at all.”




is that an endorsement of gay sex?

lucky4west:
nice epistle, and very educative, for people who celebrates Ash Wednesday i do not have a problem with that, i'm a Pentecostal we do not celebrate it ...however i would love to add that having a godly sorrow for sin r genuine repentance goes beyond an outward sign of carrying ash on the forehead...if your heart and attitude towards God and man is not reformed as an evident of a re-birth( being born again) and daily following in that routine then the outward sign is a waste, true worshipers will worship in spirit and truth..your spirit knowing what is right to do and truth-God's word...i think one of the reasons some Pentecostal Christians tend to often criticize orthodox christian notably Catholics is their emphasis on physical signs and activities without an inward/inner re-generation ...we learn every day and there is no need to antagonize one another

this is just incorrect.


catholics do not emphasize physical signs without an inward regeneration.

funny enough, the reading at mass in ash wednesday is usually from the book of Joel where it says rend your hearts not your garment and turn to the Lord, even the gospel passage will usually be Jesus saying when u fast do not put on a glomy look like the pharisees who like to show off outward signs without the inward reality. in fact the preaching that day will be centered on interior repentance, metanoia. so for you to claim that the catholic church emphasizes outward signs without a similar emphasis on the inward regeneration is totally wrong and probably shows you haven't really been to a catholic church to be informed on their attitude to outward signs.

onlyinJESUS:
they are credobaptists.
they believe that infants can't be Baptized because they haven't made a profession of faith.

lolol
so you believe that a right understanding of the covenant means denying baptism to children?

GLYCOLYSISS:
OK ,I have seen the source...
But I tell you these, no protestant will ever put down that article ,and he/she is a pastor ?
Questionable !

well a protestant did and a pastor at that.

EdifiedHebrew:
Is Yahawashi Hamasciach whom you called Jesus christ a Black man or whiteman?
Is mary a black woman or a white woman?
what colour of the Images of HAMASCIACH did find?

you are free to take a look and decide for yourself


https://www.viator.com/en-HK/tours/Rome/Z-Catacombs-Christian-Tour-Rome-drive-to-Ancient-Appian-Way/d511-21340P23

So it seems you agree that gay sex is an abomination, but being gay and being sexually attracted to same sex which culminates in gay sex which is an abominable sin, is not a sin but a sin which I made it up in my own head.

So I would like you to please reconcile that saying of yours with this saying of Jesus here concerning the sin of adultery:

Matthew 5:27-28 (KJV)

Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery:
But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

So tell me if being gay and sexually attracted to someone of the same sex, is not the same thing as committing the abominable sin of gay sex in one's heart, that should warrant telling them "go and sin no more"?

And you said that a homophobic cannot be righteous

If so, what defines a homophobic for you?

And Is it possible for someone who stones those who practice homosexuality to death as it was commanded in the laws of Moses not to be homophobic?

For instance, if Moses or Joshua had obeyed the commandment of God and had kept the commandment of God in the respect of those who have gay sex, and hence stoned them to death, is it possible for them not to be homophobic?

If no, then does being homophobic make them not to be righteous?

lust is different from sexual orientation, i find women attractive, i am a heterosexual male, those doesn't mean i lust after every woman i see.
i gay man can find a fellow man attractive, it is a disorder but it is not a sin unless he lust after that man.

so there are 3 levels.
sexual orientation
lust
sex.
whether you are straight or gay, at the level of sexual orientation there is no sin there. if u allow yourself to be moved into lust then there is sin. sodomy and fornication is also sin.

but the very fact that a person is oriented gay does not in and of itself make that person a sinner.
do you understand?


Moses and Joshua also stoned people caught in adultery. if a christian stones an adulterer to death today will you call that person righteous?

i know i wont, so too i will not call a homophobe a righteous person simply because moses dis that.

EdifiedHebrew:
Matthew 23: 9 And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.

10 Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ.

11 But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant.

12 And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased; and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted.

For even if you had ten thousand others to teach you about Christ, you have only one spiritual father. For I became your father in Christ Jesus when I preached the Good News to you.
1 cor 4:15

jesusjnr2020:
What do you have to say now, eh?

Are you still going to blindly defend your Pope endorsed gay sex?

bobo, be informed before you post.

the pope did not endorse gay sex

budaatum:
Don't mind some people. God bless me they are unhappy, do they think God is a poor non-blessing dead God They must think God is a stone!

Welcome back 09. You've missed a lot!

God didn't bless these people, they are only milking their congregations.


There is a special curse in the bible for shepherds who milk their sheep in this way.

frugal:
Oshiomhole killed it, then Obaseki buried it. Oshiomhole keeps digging for a possible resurrection. Obaseki says no way that's ever happening.

We'll see how it pans out.

oshiomole never tried to be a godfather in EDO state. That is just propagada

Myself2:
Someone remind me exactly how Oshiomhole issued proclamation for the assembly in his second term.Was it not the same Oshiomhole that sent thugs in the middle of the night to remove the roof of the Edo assembly so his men in the assembly could be sitting in govt house?? Oyegun was national chairman of APC then but he let Oshiomhole be

oshiomole inaugurated his house well according to law. He didn't do a night inauguration.

It is true he removed the roof of the house of assembly claiming he wanted to repair it. But he never hid the time for assembly meeting or inauguration

captianfreeman:
How is that the business of the President? He is directly asking the Governor to join the league of law breakers. There is no democracy in the world where you issue proclamation twice.
The president need to be school on the importance of obeying the laws of the land and following due process.

what law breaker?

The governor failed to inaugurate the house properly, he should simply do so instead of looking for public sympathy for his illegality

fineboynl:
Kaduna man now deciding for edo state house of assembly. the same oshiomole that claim he is fighting okorocha dynasty and god fatherism spearheaded amache god son and now Edo states.

Oshiomole never acted like a God father in Edo State. This is all Obaseki trying to play God and taking everyone for fools.

AreaFada2:
Nor mind that one. The fat guy in N. Korea young enough to be Buhari's grandson has his fingers on nuclear bomb button. Buhari commands armed forces with inferior weapons to Boko and person nor go hear word.

Which part of the constitution permits the president to meddle in state politics.

The mistake of Edo is to still follow a SW party after breaking away from Western Region. Edo and Delta shouid revive the old Midwest party. Our history has shown us their tricks already. They

Neither APC nor PDP has the interest of our people at heart. Leave their dirty bigotted national politics to them and focus on improving the lot of local Midwest people.

Before they say I hate SW, following SW godfathers means being sold to Hausa Fulani. Just like we are seeing now.

this is party politics

adanny01:
He has no such powers and has claimed no such powers. What he has is influence, the President also has power to write the NA to take over the State assembly.

What Obaseki is doing is totally wrong and must be condemned by all well meaning people.

The fact that he (Obaseki) has no control over majority of the elected house members does not mean he should undermine a constitutional arm of government. The fact that there is a constitutional loophole doesn't give the gov the right to undermine the Constitution, it doesn't speak well of him.

All i used to know is that he was a good governor who is liked by his people, but now, i see a desperate politician trying every illegal means to find the reigns of power. He has forgotten that power was used in given him the power he has and desires more.

I understand that he needs to wield power yo be respected in the state, i also understand that Oshiomhole is overstretching his powers but 2 wrongs dont make a right.

oshiomole did not overstretch his powers. This falls exactly on Obaseki's lap.

AreaFada2:
Please go ask OBJ. I am not his PA and not in his party. Did I support him back then?

Any president should not interfere anyhow and should rather encourage constional means to address it.

Oshiomhole used fewer assembly members doing his proclamation. I did not support or oppose it if the law allows it.

the house of representatives that has the power to address the matter and they recommended that a new proclamation be done.

But buhari is doing is about finding a political solution.

Actually Oshiomole proclaimed the house correctly, informed everyone and held the inauguration during house hours.

Obaseki failed in all that

itsene:
What Obaseki, Idahosa, Oyegun and co- travelers " should do now is tell Buhari to get lost and remind Buhari that edo is not Abuja.
After that we can testify to Obaseki' s foolishness.

hmm.

Sorry for Obaseki

LoJ:
People who use the male and female reference of Genesis 1, quickly forget that there are other instances where the same expression is used.

Genesis 6:19 You are to bring into the ark two of all living creatures, male and female, to keep them alive with you

When god asks Noah to bring all the living animals of the earth, he likewise used the term male and female. Do you mean there were only 2 animals he brought since it is singular?

Male and female simply mean there are two genders. No that there are only 2 people.

In the same vein, when a single man has 20 wives, or a single lady has 20 husbands, each ones are his wife / her husband. So the "let each one have his husband" principle is not broken.

Similarly, love your neighbor as yourself does not mean you have only one neighbor. No matter how many neighbor you have, love each one as yourself.

Thanks for reading my submissions.

Cc. MiddleDimension, Ubenedictus, lilmissfavvy.

lol.

There are stronger arguments in the thread

Mk12:
get your facts right. it was lawan who personally asked ameachi to bow and go. the minority has only done that for one person who is an ex federal lawmaker

it is the minority leader who has spoken first most often thought out the screening.

Check it

MiddleDimension:
the only reason born-agains are against polygamy is because their pastors and priests told them it is not in accordance with ''the word of god''. but the truth remain that their pastor did nit tell them, because he doesn't know better!

the likes of donnie, when he left the Catholic church, would probably thinkthe Catholic doctrine of confession id against 'the word of god'. but ask him his opinion on the same topic now that oyaks has also believed in the sacrament of reconciliation and i am sure he will say it is Biblical. it is possible that the Catholics in explaining to him, used the same points and scriptural references oyaks used in his devotional. but no, he did mot see it until he heard it from Oyaks himself.

the same way the eaoteric organizations like the rosicrucian order use to tell them Christianity isn't a religion but they never listened until oyakhs started saying the same thing, and it spread to other churches, then they begin to parrot it like it is a new revelation.

You do have a point.

I once explained the trinity to a friend, he totally disagreed with all the passages.
Three months later he was expressing trinitarian faith during prayers, I asked him how manage, he said a televangelist explained it to him.


The issue was not that my explanation was wrong, I did better than the televangelist, the problem was that I am not his pastor.


So yes, protestants flow with their pastors, but for me polygamy is an open and shut case. I would have to reexplain alot to accommodate it. That's some insincere mental gymnastics.

Maximus69:
Fine!

So why been disfellowshiped if the Church's decision was right?

Because according to the Bible an excommunicated member has been handed over to the devil! 1Timothy 1:20
If he later started his own Church only to come out saying this after 40 years, is he a repentant wrongdoer or an opportunist who just left the church to make money, by starting his own?

Surely he never left his former Church on a good note, so who ordained baba to be a Certified shepherd?

good question

Mk12:
they objected in most cases.even Goje an apc lawmaker objected in the case of ameachi but always overruled by the bow and go senate president

they didn't object in most cases. The person moving the motion for take a bow and go is the leader of PDP in the Senate, the APC people just support the motion.

A shout out to Goje for even trying.

Jetrue3oo:
I don't know why you APC people are so stupid, who force you people to copy PDP.I thought you people wanted to change things.
Thunder fire you there.

this is not APC PDP issue, it is a tradition in the Senate, ex federal lawmakers get to take a bow and go. If you want to change it someone needs to raise the motion

pinkPUSSY:
Julismma Aka Osagyfo,You are the one that didn't read the content of what you posted.. Saying that Anioma is an ethnic group is like saying that Onisha or Nnewi is an ethnic group.
Anioma is a name given to Igbo speaking part of Delta State, Delta North to be precise by Chief Osadebe in 70's.
Anioma is not an ethnic group..
They are Igbos. Go and tell Ngozi Okonjo Iweala that she's not Igbo or Chuzie family..( The Biafran war commander) that they are not Igbos..

Stop chasing shadow by thinking you can divide Igbos simply because some fell into SS extraction.
This is your mission on nairaland with your numerous monikers. You opened this thread not because of the content of the news, but you opened it continue your failed game

@ the topic.. the thread is not about promoting lesibianism like some people are thinking due to headline ... It's about ensuring the continuation of a linage

The chief family in Owa Oyinbo is named ISIBOR, which is a Benin name.

Anioma has a lot of different mixture

burner44:
You know nothing JON SNOW

Lol.

GOT, great movie.

Aurielfinizu:
maybe is where God has really placed me since to worship

thou i love catholic Hymns songs a lot... as a chorister there now i love

that's OK.

Sing praises!

RandomGuy48:
Stands tall? I suppose it stands tall in supporting Jehovah's Witness doctrines but only because it's notorious for twisting its translation to fits JW ideas.

I don't know if "50,000" errors is true or not, but there are definitely a good number. Here are a few:

Acts 7:4 and Hebrews 4:8 are, as should be obvious from context, are referring to Joshua from the New Testament. But the King James Version incorrectly translates Joshua as "Jesus."

Acts 12:4 refers to Passover. The KJV incorrectly translates it as "Easter".

The King James Version repeatedly refers to the unicorns (e.g. Numbers 23:22, Job 39:9-10, Isaiah 34:7), a fantasy beast. This is an incorrect translation of the Hebrew word re'em. "Unicorn" doesn't even make sense in Deuteronomy 33:17 because it says that they have multiple horns whereas a unicorn, as implied by its very name, has only one.

Ofcourse translations are imperfect